Xbox 360 vs PS3... The Final Showdown.

[James]

Choose Wii.

Lowest attachment of all 3 consoles, to be fair.

[Baleout]

Lowest what?

[James]

Attachment, rate.
Gosh.

[Baleout]

Ah, OK.

Lowest attachment of all 3 consoles, to be fair.

Really? O_O Got any figures?

[Kaiden]

http://nexgenwars.com/

Wii wins xD

[clyzm]

PS3 is a dying hope, like Ron Paul.

[James]

Ah, OK.

Lowest attachment of all 3 consoles, to be fair.

Really? O_O Got any figures?

4.50 - Wii
5 - PS3
7 - Xbox 360

IIRC.

Wii is being ruined by pirate fags.

[xProtocol Rain]

Yeah sure, I would buy a outdated piece of equipment with poor graphic power and lack of gaming quality or quantity

Ya bought a 360 then
What is this world coming to.

360 has poor graphic power? Really?

Anyone remember when I compared both systems? Showing their pros AND cons?

Sales:
You can say whatever you want and give your opinion but facts speak louder. Bloomberg recently reported that ps3 low sales will cause MASSIVE financial losses for the end of its last financial quarter. Bloomberg says it will be up to 664$ Million dollars.

Source:
http://www.firingsquad.com/

Their are reasons why Ken Kutaragi is no longer in charge of SCE. Kutaragi is being blamed for this whole mess. Now if we go by the numbers in each country will figure out that ps3 is having a low performance compared to what was expected. Like in April of this year, the ps3 was surprisingly outsold by the gameboy Advance, the numbers are the following:

Nintendo DS: 471,000
Nintendo Wii: 360,000
Sony Playstation 2: 194k
Sony PSP: 183,000
Xbox 360 (including Elite) 174,000
GameBoy Advance: 84,000
Playstation 3: 82,000

Source:
Http://spong.com/

Performance:
Prepare your little brain for the technical stuff. The following are the technical specifications for both consoles, these numbers were made public by Sony and Microsoft themselfs. Let's start with the CPU shall we?

CPU of the xbox 360:

# 90 nm process, 165 million transistors
(# 65 nm process SOI revision in 2007)

Three symmetrical cores,

each one SMT-capable and clocked at 3.2 GHz

# one VMX-128 SIMD unit per core, dual threaded.

# 128x128 register file

for each hardware thread, 2 sets per VMX unit.

1 MB L2 cable (lockable by the GPU)
# Dot product performance:
9.6 billion per second ( 33.6 billion per second combined with the GPU)
115 GFLOPS theoretical peak performance
# ROM storing Microsoft private encrypted keys

Now, here is the PS3's CPU:

PowerC-Base core @3.2 GHz
1 VMX vector unit per core
512KB LB cache
7 x SPE @3.2GHz
7 x 128b 128 SIMD GPRs
7 x 256KB SRAM for SPE

Dot Product performance at 22.4 billion (51 billion when combined with the GPU)

1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy

Total float performance: 218 GFLOPS

If you analyze those numbers you'll see that the advantage goes to the ps3. Oh, but don't celebrate quite yet! Wink

Both of the CPU's were tested under controlled environments, these numbers are just THEORETICAL, and do not represent how well the consoles preform. The most important example is that, according to this PS3's CPU produes 218GFLOPS. However, this test was done using the 8 SPE that cell has, however, the PS3 only dedicates 6 SPE for games. If you take that into consideration the number of GFLOPS produced can be reduced significantly. IBM, which tested a Cell in a controlled environment running the 8 SPE of Cell, it yielded a performance of 155.5GFLOPS. if it took 8 SPE to do that, theirs no way in hell a 6 SPE will be able to achieve that level of performance. Again, this was a CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT, they didn't include important elements such as DMA or the memory system. Take all that into consideration and the performance is reduced to 73.4GFLOPS, and even that is out of reach. Laughing

Its also a fact that PS2 had produced twice a much as the original XBOX, and that didn't even make the ps2 preform any better. Laughing

This is the explanation of why the specification numbers don't always determine how well a console will preform in the real world. Their is a difference between theoretical numbers and REAL WORLD PERFORMANCE! Neutral

The ps3 has one PowerPC core, similar to the 3 PowerPC cores of the 360. The ps3 also has 8 SPE, the 8th is disabled to improve yields and the 7th is used to run the operating system. That leaves us with 6 SPE available for games. >_>

Thanks to the 3 cores o the xbox 360 its able to work better with A.I and scripting then the ps3, because it has ONLY ONE CORE.

GPU:

Initially were told that the RSX (the ps3's video card) is capable of 1.8 Terraflops, which is NOT true. Rest assure that RSX will never achieve this type of performance.

Example:

the X1900XTX has far more raw horse power then the RSX, clocked at 650MHz speed, along with 24 more pixel shader Pipelines and yet X1900XTX is just over 500 GFLOPS. And to think a Videocard with far less raw horse power can achieve that level of performance is just plain IMPOSSIBLE!

0bv Sony shows this completely unreal levels of performance to hype their console, but it is far beyond of what it is really capable of. And you say us 360 owners were fooled? Think again you idiot..

The RSX is pretty much a 7800 GTX class GPU in some cases worse in some cases better, nothing that is really new.. Now the same cant be said about the 360's GPU at all.

the 360 GPU is a excellent piece of work, far more advanced with much better performance.

The ATI Xenos was clocked at 500MHz and it was 48-way parallel floating-point dynamically-scheduled shader along with a polygon performance of 500 million triangles a second. Good... Fucking.... Game...

Can the 360's CPU achieve that? You damn right it can. But their would be no color, nor would their be any pixels at all. 0bv because of its 48 shader units are capable of performing vortex operations and they were all used to produce triangles in this test. 0bv in real world performance, not all 48 are used for triangles, their has to be color and pixels too.

Other GPU's are only capable of dedicating 8 shader units to vortex operations.

Operating System:

PS3:

32 MB out of the 256 MB that's available

GDDR3 memory off the RSX chip

64 mb of the 256mb available XDR memory off the Cell CPU

1 SPE of the 7 constantly reserved 1 SPE of 7 able to be "taken" by the OS at a moments notice (games must give it up if its requested)

XBOX 360:

32MB of the 512MB available GDDR3 RAM

3% CPU time on Core1 and Core2 (nothing is reserved on Core0)

The Xbox 360 wins because it is able to dedicate less memory to run its operating system, and more memory to run games. Nobody knows how the 360 can use such little amount of memory for this, some say its because of microsofts experience with operating systems.

Last but not least,

BLU RAY:

Some people say that because of blu-ray has more capacity games will have more graphics, well this aint true. the fact is that ps3 has two separated memory pools of 256MB a pop, it can best dedicate 256MB of memory to textures at any given moment..

However, Xbox 360 uses unified memory for a total of 512MB. That alone is a major limiting factor for blu-ray. blu-ray will lead to longer games? LOL!! Mass Effect will have over 60 hours of gameplay and Oblivion has over 120 hours. Compression also needs to be taken into consideration, and it has come a long way. Both consoles have amazing compression abilities.

Having more space does NOT mean the ps3 wont have to compress data, as it helps reduce load times. Speaking of which DVD's load faster than blu-rays, actually their are more cons then pros in the addition of blu-ray, it might benefit Sony, but NOT the customer.

I ask you again.. Who got fooled?? YOU DID!!

Will PS3 games have more levels and the kind of game content that would define a game experience?? People forget that whatever you see in a game level takes up space in memory. If the PS3 had 2 GB of ram THEN BluRay would be effective. But so far its just a motherfucking luxury.

Sources:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?a...
360 GPU from ATI and Microsoft
http://forum.teamxbox.com/printthread...

Long article explaining the 360 GPU
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xenos/


IBM White paper regarding PS3 CPU performance
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks.

block diagram of 360 gpu provided by ATI
http://www.techreport.com/etc/2005q2/...


block diagram of 360 cpu
http://media.arstechnica.com/articles...

block diagram of PS3 cpu
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks...

Interview with John Carmack about the CPUs of the 360 and PS3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_PFUw29U4J8




A picture provided by sony telling what the ps3 gpu is
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/d...




Picture showing the 360 GPUs daughter die, something no other GPU has
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xeno...




John Carmacks entire interview at Quackcon
http://video.google.com/videoplay?doc...

*sigh*

Ok, i've noticed ALOT of ranting & flaming over what is better, PS3 or Xbox 360, in this post, there will be price comparison, and Pros and cons of each. Then you can decide for yourself. I don't know alot about the XBox's specs, so i've done what i know....

Code: Select all

Xbox 360                   Standard           Ex. Price
-----------------------------------------------------------
20 Gig HDD                Yes                   Around £20.
DVD Drive                  Yes                   Around £50.
HD DVD Drive             No                    Around £120
HD Only                      No                     N/A           
Wi-Fi Con                    No                    Around £50
Xbox Live Fee              N/A                  Around £100 yearly? =/
Dual Core Extreme Retail     Yes           £200       

Overall Price (Amazon): £229
Parts Brought Seperatly: Around £340.


Pros Of The XBox 360;
*Has More Games At current


Cons Of The Xbox 360;
*Paying for Online play.
*Very Noisy Fan.
*Overheats alot.







PS3                         Standard                       Ex. Price
------------------------------------------------------------------
60 Gig HDD              Yes                               £80
DVD Compatible Drive   Yes                          £50
Blu-Ray Drive            Yes                              £300-700
HD Only                    No                               N/A
Wi-Fi Con                  Yes                             £50
Online Fee                 N/A                             Free
Unreleased Nivida GPU    Yes                        N/A (£800)
8 Core Cell Processor     Yes                         N/A (£600-800)

Overall Price (Amazon): £349
Parts Brought Seperatly: Around £2,140


Pros Of The PS3;
*Better Graphics.
*More Powerful.
*Cheaper, for what your getting.
*Free online play.
*Rarely Overheats.

Cons Of The PS3;
*It is £349..
*Not alot of games at current, however alot of major games are set to be released next year. (Such As: GTA IV, Silent Hill V, Mercs 2: WiF, GT5)

What's this bullshit? Better graphics? Whatever type of drug you've been injecting/smoking send some of that my way. Put up or shut up, Klop. If you REALLY researched this then please show the link.

I'll admit the ps3 is a fantastic piece of work, same for the Wii and the Xbox 360. All of them have their up's and downs. Their is no "Superior" system in my opinion. Let's end this foolishness. Because some people seem to be talking straight out of their asses trying to defend their "precious Playstation 3".

[Psykorgasm]

Yeah sure, I would buy a outdated piece of equipment with poor graphic power and lack of gaming quality or quantity

Ya bought a 360 then
What is this world coming to.

Oh dear, you really don't have a clue don't you.

[{17}Ales]

Hmm I think most of us would be agreeing with the PS3 if the 360 hadnt come out first(1 year) and had been developed as well as the PS3. Thats how I see it either way, the only reason I dont like the 360 is because of how its changed and manipulated my friends in some way(seriously).

Ok I admit to you I like the 360 GPU it does have double the pixel pipeline than the PS3(360:48 PS3:24). Everything else about the 360 doesn't really impress me(Apart from its failure rate ROFL).

[xProtocol Rain]

If your referring to the 3 ring of death when you say "failure rate" that has decreased quite a bit...

And I honestly don't think anything would dramatically increase the ps3's success rate even if it did come out before the Xbox 360. People would just be starving for blockbuster exclusives for a longer period of time.

[ynnaD]

I like my PS3, i don't really feel the need to fight it's corner, if i like it, thats all that matters

[¤[A]Raiden¤]

Man tbh with you all, this is bullshit about whats better out of the 2, Both 360 and PS3 are practially enough the same. People who like 360 like 360 and same with ps3, leave it at that lol.

[Spiderbot01]

I like my PS3, i don't really feel the need to fight it's corner, if i like it, thats all that matters

/topic

[clyzm]

Who likes DREAMCAST

[James]

Toy Commander.

the only reason I dont like the 360 is because of how its changed and manipulated my friends in some way(seriously).

[{17}Ales]

Wrong section for SPAM Jay >_>.

If your referring to the 3 ring of death when you say "failure rate" that has decreased quite a bit...

And I honestly don't think anything would dramatically increase the ps3's success rate even if it did come out before the Xbox 360. People would just be starving for blockbuster exclusives for a longer period of time.

It may have decreased but after how long?!?

PS3 would have obviously have better success because think about all those game designers they wanna get into the action make some money gain some respect. So they didn't wait another year for a properly developed console. They just jumped right onto the 360 as it was the only next-gen game on the market(the Wii don't count), and viola there you have many games for the 360!

[James]

Wrong section for SPAM Jay >_>.

I'd like you to point spam or this forum's standards of off-topic discussion in my post.

[xProtocol Rain]

I like my PS3, i don't really feel the need to fight it's corner, if i like it, thats all that matters

See now why cant people just say things like this instead of making up shit to make ps3 seem like its the better system?


Nothing wrong with liking it. If it makes you happy then kudos to you. This thread should be locked. Seriously..

PS3 would have obviously have better success because think about all those game designers they wanna get into the action make some money gain some respect.

What the fuck?

[James]

Nothing wrong with liking it. If it makes you happy then kudos to you. This thread should be locked. Seriously..

It has been, but "Klop deserves a free voice".

[xProtocol Rain]

Nothing wrong with liking it. If it makes you happy then kudos to you. This thread should be locked. Seriously..

It has been, but "Klop deserves a free voice".

He also deserves to be laughed at. Sense he had the nerve to create this thread, call it "360 vs ps3 the final showdown", then post a heap of crap that's not even all true.

[clyzm]

Who knew there would be so much strife on [A] forums about consoles?

Klop, Ales, just stop trying to provoke the X360 members of this board with your obvious message of thinking the PS3 is better. If you like it, play it, we don't want to hear how cool and effective it is.

In all honesty I like the Xbox 360 but I won't dehumanize Sony fanboys and they shouldn't do the same to Xbox fanboys. It's two consoles that have been fought ever since their release, stop trying to add kindling to a dead fire. The argument has grown tiring now, even I know when to stop a stupid argument.

We're on a tiny, tiny corner of the internet arguing about consoles whereas people elsewhere are enjoying life and living it to the fullest. Do you think anybody else will listen to your opinion regardless how truthful and relevant you think it is?

Do you think you are on a mission of peace and justice to make every Xbox user suddenly drop their Xbox, their Live and go "Blasphemy! I'll get a PS3." and march off to the game store to purchase a PS3?

You can't change opinions if people don't want to, so stop forcing your propaganda down every user's throats.